(SOLVED)Case Study Employee Retention and Separation Assignment Instructions

Discipline: Law

Type of Paper: Creative writing

Academic Level: PhD

Paper Format: APA

Pages: 4 Words: 1878

Question

Case Study Employee Retention and Separation Assignment Instructions

Overview

You will identity and write a critique of 3 case studies related to a legal issue facing human resource management in public administration. Each case study assignment is designed to help you make application of course content to the area of human resource management in public administration. The case studies will integrate relevant legal cases in which it supports their work and ensure a biblical integration to support position on whether the right or incorrect decision was made in the case


Instructions


Each case study critique must be 6 - 8 double-spaced pages of content (not counting title page, references, etc.) and discuss the major facts of the case, and you should tell whether or you believe the right decision(s) was/were made and why. Students should incorporate a minimum of one classroom reading into this assignment. 


The format of each case study should be as follows:

·         Identify the important facts in the case study

·         What decision(s) were made in the case study

·         Do you believe the decisions were appropriate?

·         Discuss any alternative solution(s) to the problem and support those solutions with additional research. Make sure your solutions are relevant to the case and able to be implemented.

·         Conclusion

·         References

·         Make sure each section is labeled appropriately (Facts, Decision, Solution, and Conclusion)

·         The paper must be written in proper APA format.

·         All papers should use the following format:  Times New Roman, 12-point font, 1” margins from left to right and top to bottom, double spaced, number pages and include a title page.


NOTE:  The following resources should be referenced using APA 7th edition:  


  • Nigro et al.: chs. 5-6
      • Sifuna-Evelia: ch. 3


 

Case Study Critique ASSIGNMENT Grading Rubric

 

 

Criteria

Levels of Achievement

Content

(70%)

Advanced

92-100%

Proficient

84-91%

Developing

1-83%

Not present

Total

Research Purpose

32.25 to 35 Points:

Presents accurate and detailed descriptions of the problems and issues central to the case; provides a well-focused analysis of strategic issues and key problems that demonstrates an excellent grasp of the situation and strategic challenges; descriptions are compelling and insightful; provides a thorough and effective executive summary. Incorporates a biblical world-view into the response.

29.5 to 32 Points:

With a few exceptions, the principal problems and issues in the case are identified and outlined; demonstrates an acceptable understanding of the issues, current situation, and strategic challenges; summary provides an adequate overview of the case issues and problems; summary is missing a few minor points, but meets expectations. Incorporates. Incorporates a biblical worldview into the response.

1 to 29.25 Points:

Does not recognize the problems or issues of the case, or identified problems and issues that are not based on facts of the case; displays little understanding of the issues, key problems, and the present situation. Does not include a biblical worldview perspective into the response.

0 Points:

Not present

 

Reasoned Analysis

32.25 to 35 Points:

Presents a balanced, in-depth, and critical assessment of the facts of the case in light of relevant empirical and theoretical research; develops insightful and well-supported conclusions using reasoned, sounds, and informed judgements.

29.5 to 32 Points:

Provides an acceptable analysis of most of the issues and problem in the case; in most instances, analysis is an adequately supported by theory; appropriate conclusions are outlined and summarized.

1 to 29.25 Points:

Simply repeats facts identified in the case and does not discuss the relevance of these facts; fails to draw conclusions, or conclusions are not justified or supported; does not present relevant research; shows no critical examination of case issues.

0 Points:

Not present

 

Structure (30%)

Advanced

92-100%

Proficient

84-91%

Developing

1-83%

Not present

Total

Formatting

18.5 to 20 Points:

·         Rules of grammar, usage, and punctuation are followed and spelling are correct. Sentences are complete, clear and concise. Rhetorical skill is shown. Sentences are well constructed, with consistently strong and varied structure. Sentence transitions are present and direct the flow of thought.  Paragraph transitions are present and logical, directing flow of thought throughout the paper.

·         Paper is laid out effectively and uses reader-friendly aids (e.g., section subheadings, table of contents, indices, appendices, etc.) as appropriate. Text, citations and Reference page(s) follow current APA style/format requirements. Paper is written in 12 point Times New Roman font, is double-spaced, and has 1” margins.

·         Grading feedback and lessons from applicable modules/weeks are fully addressed/incorporated.

16.75 to 18.25 Points:

·         Paper contains minimal errors in grammar, usage, punctuation and spelling.  Sentences are generally complete, clear and concise. Rhetorical skill is shown, although a few Points: may require clarification. Some variation in sentence structure or transitions may be required to improve flow of discussion. Some paragraph transitions may require improvement.

·         Paper is generally laid out effectively and uses some reader-friendly aids as appropriate. Text, citations and Reference page(s) contains minimal inconsistencies with current APA style/format requirements. Paper may contain some inconsistencies with required font, spacing and margin requirements.

·         Grading feedback and lessons from applicable modules/weeks are generally addressed/ incorporated.

               

1 to 16.5 Points:

·         Paper contains numerous errors in grammar, usage, punctuation and spelling. Multiple sentences may be incomplete or ambiguously worded. Sentence transitions may be weak, insufficiently directing the flow of thought.

·         Paper may be laid out ineffectively or may not use sufficient reader-friendly aids as appropriate. Text, citations and/or Reference page(s) do not follow current APA style/format requirements. Paper may not follow required font, spacing and margin requirements.

·         Grading feedback and lessons from applicable modules/weeks are insufficiently addressed/incorporated.

0 Points:

Not present

 

Page Length

9.25 to 10 Points:

4-5 pages of content in length (not counting the title page or references); double-spaced.

8.5 to 9 Points:

1 page more or less than the required length range (not counting the title page or references); double-spaced.           

1 to 8.25 Points:

More than 1 page more or less than the required length range (not counting the title page or references); double-spaced.

0 Points:

Not present

 

Professor Comments:

 

Total:

/100

 


EXPERT SOLUTION PREVIEW


Human resource management deals with employee-related issues like health, safety, discrimination, harassment, labor rights among others, and the bible also supports the work of human resource management, (Sifuna-Evelia, 2017). According to (Hughes 2019), due to the issues relating to the employees, human resource manages its employees following laws enacted by the government to protect employees in a workplace. To explain the legal issues influencing human resources in public administration, I will discuss three case studies.


Case study One: Bostock v. Clayton County, 590 U.S. (2020), Sexual Orientation Discrimination


Facts


Bostock v. Clayton County, 590 U.S. (2020), was a case in which the court held that the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is a law that protects employees against discrimination, including because they are gay or transgender. It was a major ruling that made history in the U.S. that was seen as protecting LGBT rights. This ruling was praised and supported by human rights activists and proponents of LGBT rights.

This case involved a complainant Gerald Bostock, fired after he started playing in a gay softball league at work. Bostock was suing his former employer for the termination of his contract because he was gay. Bostock held that this was discrimination based on sexual orientation. The court was a divide on whether Title VII protects employees against this form of gay discrimination. But on Jun. 15, 2020, the court ruled that discrimination based on sexual orientation is also a form of discrimination, and such discrimination has been all along with a ........